This is the mail archive of the
cygwin@cygwin.com
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
RE: Missing commands/incorrect behaviour after update
- From: "Eriksson, Michael" <Michael dot Eriksson at bauer-partner dot com>
- To: <cygwin at cygwin dot com>
- Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 19:14:16 +0100
- Subject: RE: Missing commands/incorrect behaviour after update
Randall
<snip>
> >Well, 0666 does not seem like a good idea, since it gives
> everyone the
> >right to change the files. Of course the main use of umask
> is to restrict
> >access from group and other.
>
> It's a very good idea and has been "the right way" (or, to use a
> now-archaic phrase, "The Unix Way (tm)") ever since version 7
> Unix when
> umask was introduced. The whole point of writing the code to
> give new files
> full access (0666 or 0777) is so that the user is in complete
> control by
> virtue of the "umask."
>
> You do understand that the umask value is "subtracted"
> (bit-wise) from the
> file mode specified by the program creating the new file
> system entity, right?
No, I was actually under the impression that is was substracted
from 777. Thank you for setting me straight.
(That comes working with windows...)
<snip>
Michael
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/